Peace vs. Justice: The Perceived and Real Contradictions of Conflict Resolution and Human Rights
Langer, Johannes. “Peace vs. Justice: The Perceived and Real Contradictions of Conflict Resolution and Human Rights.” Criterios 8, no. 1 (2015): 165–89. https://doi.org/10.21500/20115733.1867.
This article discusses the debate between peace and justice. It addresses the fundamental question of whether putting peace before justice, or vice versa, is the most effective way to resolve conflicts and address human rights violations. The author argues that this dilemma arises during negotiations, when the fate of perpetrators becomes a critical issue. Two main options can happen: prosecuting perpetrators through criminal justice systems or granting varying degrees of amnesty to facilitate peace negotiations. This dillema highlights the tension between achieving justice for victims or ensuring peace for the wider population.
Ten case studies from both Africa and Europe are presented to illustrate the impact of justice mechanisms in post-conflict societies. These studies highlight the complexities and challenges of prioritising justice, as well as the effects of intervening institutions such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), which include political implications, limitations of transitional justice mechanisms, and the potential to undermine peace talks. Furthermore, the article delves into the opposing perspectives of human rights advocates and conflict resolution practitioners as another way to frame the peace versus justice debate. Langer explains that, while both seek sustainable peace, their approaches differ, with human rights activists advocating for accountability and conflict resolution experts emphasising communication and mediation.
Langer encourages readers to think of peace and justice as mutually reinforcing rather than mutually exclusive. This can be accomplished by reflecting on how we define both of these concepts, in the sense that our understanding of peace should shift from ‘negative’ peace (the absence of violence) to ‘positive’ peace (social justice), and justice should be employed with more nuance, implementing methods that go beyond retribution and emphasise the importance of restoration. Similarly, closing the gap between human rights and conflict resolution necessitates increased awareness and collaboration between fields. The article concludes that understanding the interconnectedness of peace and justice is critical for successful conflict resolution and reconciliation efforts.